Cosmic Copies

illustris

So, as soon as practically possible, simulation of the universe gets started.

Hmmm.

ADDED: It’s all about splitting (see the discussion below).

May 9, 2014admin 16 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Cosmos

TAGGED WITH : ,

16 Responses to this entry

  • Cosmic Copies | Reaction Times Says:

    […] By admin […]

    Posted on May 9th, 2014 at 12:51 pm Reply | Quote
  • j.ont Says:

    “Individual galaxies will move very very quickly further apart and become completely isolated from each other at a speed faster than light. Each would become completely isolated and would become its own universe. That’s the prediction.”

    When did this become a prediction? It’s been a while since I last read about end-of-universe theories, but I don’t remember anything like this.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    It’s a result of cosmic inflation. The intrinsic expansion of space accelerates until even light from distant galaxies becomes inaccessible. Radical fragmentation of the universe is the consequence. (I agree it’s weird, and for some reason not much discussed outside niche circles.)

    [Reply]

    j. ont Reply:

    Is there a relatively concise and lay-friendly resource for this sort of thing somewhere? I’m curious regarding the state of cosmic speculation.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Sean Carroll covers current cosmology topics very clearly.

    Posted on May 10th, 2014 at 12:10 am Reply | Quote
  • Handle Says:

    In the category of “If they can put a man on the moon, why can’t they X?”

    If they have the computational capability to meaningfully simulate 13 billion years worth of dynamics of an entire Universe, then why can’t they accurately forecast climate on our own planet?

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Can’t we just uncouple the Heisenberg Compensators.

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    [Insert joke about spherical cows in a vacuum here]

    [Reply]

    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    Rand Simberg asks, “If they can put a man on the moon, why can’t they stop people from using bad analogies?”

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 10th, 2014 at 1:38 am Reply | Quote
  • Scharlach Says:

    Radical fragmentation of the universe is the consequence.

    Endless divergence as the future of history? Excellent. I, too, had thought that contraction back to a singularity was still the favored model. This is better.

    This seems to dovetail with the evolution of species, as well. A whole species doesn’t transform together—the silly monkey-to-man visuals are unhelpful. Rather, as everyone around here recognizes, certain subsets of a species will gain advantages over the others or lose out on advantages that others are gaining. The result is a process of slow divergence within a species, so that at certain points in time, you have multiple sub-species existing side-by-side, moving toward the moment when they are finally cut off from one another—like the inaccessible light of galaxies diverged too far in space/time, the genetic material of distant ancestors at some point becomes inaccessible. And thank God. What a disaster the universe would be if everything were accessible to everything else!

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Totally — which is to say anti-totalistically. At every level up to the scale of the cosmos, dis-solidarity is the future, or rather the futures. (That’s even before strange simulation-type involutions are invoked.)

    [Reply]

    Handle Reply:

    I’m no so sure.

    The current model of the total mass-energy of the universe allows for regular matter (4.9%), dark matter (26.8%) and dark energy (84.5%). The question is, where did that particular distribution come from?

    One of the assumptions of physics is that certain fundamental constants are invariant with time (and position, and reference frame, …). And when we look into deep space, since we are also looking into the past, we can see some evidence for that.

    Except now, with the BICEP results, we are able to peer into the first instant of creation, and notice that the situation was somewhat different. Those results seem to indicate that the average energy state was at the level where all the fundamental forces unify, and furthermore, where even the three components of mass-energy unify and convert into each other and are interchangeable.

    Indeed, the existence of cosmic inflation in those earliest moments seems to indicate that the universe was once composed almost entirely of dark energy and that as it forced space to expand, it began to partially covert into the other two forms until it was ‘relaxed’ enough to dramatically slow its acceleration of space.

    Furthermore, there are some lingering issues concerning the question of whether black holes are genuine singularities, or just extremely compact. In typical General Relativity, there is nothing to hold back the infinite collapse except perhaps some quantum fluctuations. But if extremely hot and compact matter can convert into dark energy, then that would generate just enough resistance to gravity to hold the black hole at equilibrium at some tiny but non-zero size.

    If you were to crunch all the matter into the universe together in one ultra-massive black hole, perhaps you would turn all the matter into dark energy, and start the process all over again.

    So, there is the possibility that the dark energy which continues to accelerate the expansion of the universe, is also slowly continuing, through random fluctuations, to convert into dark and regular matter, and that eventually, when one includes the likely accumulation of supermassive black holes, the gravitational tide will turn, and everything will crunch down again. And then perhaps it begins again. And again, and again, …

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 10th, 2014 at 2:24 pm Reply | Quote
  • NRx_N00B Says:

    What is the finest resolvable temporal and spatial granularity of material reality? Answer: Planck time and length?? This would have to be the granularity of a single “realization” of simulated reality. No?

    As an aside….
    At what scale do extra dimensions—beyond x, y, z, t—required by string theory come into play?

    [Reply]

    Alrenous Reply:

    It depends on the particular parameters of the variant in question. Since none of the string theories are supported by evidence it’s climate modelling for mathies.

    But I think most of them are around 10^-30 metres or so. 10 000 to 100 000 times the Planck scale.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 11th, 2014 at 4:44 pm Reply | Quote
  • It from bit | Regulus in Virgo Says:

    […] Grid for ruling Goë: Valefor. Ruling from 10-May @ 18:01 UTC (11:01AM PDT) to 15-May. On the 10th, It’s all about splitting |&| eigentliche Dynamik da logischen […]

    Posted on May 13th, 2014 at 2:31 am Reply | Quote
  • Lightning Round – 2014/05/14 | Free Northerner Says:

    […] A simulation of the universe. […]

    Posted on May 14th, 2014 at 5:03 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment